Saturday, September 18, 2004

Norwegian Hospital Announces Euthanasia of Those Under 12

Ethicist Says Killing of Sick Children Shouldn't Surprise Us
Dennis K. Brown, University of Notre Dame

SOUTH BEND, Ind., Sept. 17 (AScribe Newswire) -- In an article posted this week on the Web site of The Weekly Standard, Wesley J. Smith reports that Groningen University Hospital in the Netherlands has announced its decision to begin euthanizing children under the age of 12, if doctors believe their suffering is intolerable or if they have an incurable illness.
According to David Solomon, W.P. and H.B. White Director of Notre Dame's Center for Ethics and Culture, the decision, however preposterous, should not be surprising.
"Smith is simply reporting what those familiar with medical policy in Europe have known for some time -- the assault on children has moved out of the academy and into the hospitals and clinics of some European nations," Solomon said. "The direct killing of seriously ill and disabled children is now widely practiced in the Netherlands and this development has been documented by such widely respected medical journals as The Lancet. Belgium also appears to be moving in the same direction.
"Many people are shocked when they discover that sober philosophers holding positions at prestigious universities in this country and Europe regularly defend the moral permissibility of the direct and fully intentional killing of young children and the severely disabled," Solomon said, adding that the first defense of such killing appeared in 1973 in an article, "A Defense of Abortion and Infanticide," written by a well known and widely respected philosopher, Michael Tooley, for Philosophy and Public Affairs, a journal published by Princeton University and regarded by many philosophers as the leading journal of ethics in the English-speaking world.
"When Princeton a few years ago named Peter Singer, the Australian philosopher now most closely identified with the worldwide movement to legitimize infanticide, to a prestigious chair of ethics in their University Center for Human Values, Princeton's position as the academic beating heart of the assault on children was solidified," Solomon said. According to Solomon, such developments "confirm what we all already know -- ideas do have consequences. Where academic philosophers lead, the illuminati who control the commanding heights of our secularized culture increasingly tend to follow. When the current Pope has spoken about contemporary culture as a "Culture of Death," some have thought his language to be hyperbolic. In light of these recent developments, however, we might conclude rather that, once again, Pope John Paul II sees more clearly -- and speaks more boldly -- than the rest of us."

The Weekly Standard

Media Moguls and Their Lack of Morality

Media Moguls and Morality: Missing the Boat?
Prizes Can't Obscure Grass-roots Interest in Religion

VENICE, Italy, SEPT. 18, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Last weekend's Venice Film Festival awards provided a classic example of media hostility to religion and moral values.

The Golden Lion for best picture went to "Vera Drake," a British film lauding abortion. The film's lead, Imelda Staunton, won the prize for best actress. A pro-euthanasia Spanish film, "Mar Adentro" (The Sea Within), won the runner-up award in the best-film category, while its lead Javier Bardem won the best-actor prize.

"Vera Drake" portrays "a seemingly ordinary housewife who performs secret abortions" in the 1950s before the procedure was legal, the London-based Times noted Monday. The film was made thanks to a grant of 1.25 million pounds ($2.2 million) from the UK Film Council. Two years ago the council financed "The Magdalene Sisters," which also won the Golden Lion award.

In an interview published Monday by the Spanish newspaper El Mundo, the director of "Vera Drake," Mike Leigh, declared it seemed ridiculous that some countries still outlaw abortion. Leigh seemed to regard abortion as a useful means to control population growth, commenting that Earth isn't getting any larger, while the number of people is.

He also said he considered including the Catholic Church's position on abortion in the film, but later dismissed the idea as being irrelevant for the picture.

Second-place winner "Mar Adentro" tells the story of Ramón Sampedro, who was paralyzed from the neck down at the age of 25. Sampedro committed suicide in 1998. Father Luis de Moya, a quadriplegic who knew Sampedro, affirmed in an interview with Zenit last week that "it seems very clear that his sad story is used in an attempt to trivialize euthanasia and in that way to prepare the terrain for its forthcoming legalization."

In fact, the British newspaper Observer noted last Sunday that the opening night of "Mar Adentro" drew most of the Spanish Cabinet, along with Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.

According to the Observer, some members of the governing Socialist Party are urging the government to set up a parliamentary committee to investigate legalizing euthanasia. "The film invites us to reflect," agreed Justice Minister Juan Fernando López Aguilar, who denied there are any immediate plans to change the law.

Zapatero, according to the British paper, commented: "The film, paradoxically, is a hymn to life. ... The defense of the freedom to die is, itself, a hymn to life."

Family fare sells

But while media elites award prizes, the box office tells another story. An analysis of box-office receipts for 250 films released in the United States last year shows that audiences clearly prefer films that defend moral values, the Washington Times reported March 25.

A report prepared by the Christian Film & Television Commission (CFTVC) found that films that emphasizing "strong moral content" made an average $92.5 million -- six times the revenue of those with an "immoral, negative content." Ted Baehr, chairman of the California-based CFTVC, said: "Movies rated G and PG consistently earn two or three times as much money on average as movies rated R."

And it seems that family films have now found a major financial backer. Philip Anschutz, co-founder of Qwest Communications International Inc., made a $5 billion fortune in oil, railroads and telecommunications. In the last few years, he has financed about a dozen projects in Hollywood, all designed to be family-friendly, according to an April 22 report in the Wall Street Journal.

Anschutz has committed more than $300 million to film projects already, and he shows no signs of stopping, the Journal said. So far his films have met with mixed success, but he has hopes for a partnership with Disney to develop C.S. Lewis' Narnia books into a series of movies.

A recent initiative to promote wholesome programs for television is the Family Friendly Programming Forum. The group was established with money from a number of major companies that felt frustrated by the lack of G-rated programs in which to show their commercials, the Washington Times reported June 28. The forum has given seed money to help develop seven TV programs for this fall's viewing.

Coverage up

In the field of news, U.S. television coverage of religion has risen, the Associated Press reported April 5. The evening news programs of the three major networks -- ABC, CBS and NBC -- did 303 stories on religion during the 12 months that ended March 1, compared with 121 stories during a one-year period in 1993, according to a study by the Media Research Center.

Coverage also increased on the morning news shows with 331 in the past year, compared with 197 in 1993. Much of the increase was due to Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the Christ'' and the 25th anniversary of John Paul II's pontificate. As well, interest in Islam has risen in the wake of terrorist attacks.

However, a notable fact is that none of the three major networks employs full-time religion correspondents. And one drawback of the increased coverage, noted the Media Research Center, is that the networks are often hostile to orthodox faiths and rely on mostly liberal religious scholars for comments.

Radio also has been a part of the revival in religion in the media. Of 13,898 stations in the United States, no fewer than 1,965 of them have a Christian format, the Denver Post reported July 18. This is up from 1,566 a decade ago, and only 399 three decades ago.

"The music is the container for the message," Jim Marshall of the National Christian Radio Association told the Denver Post. "Music is the language of the culture. ... We're discovering what Jesus knew in the first century. The way he communicated was in short stories. That's what these songs do."

The article also noted that Christian music is increasingly successful. In 2003, it sold 47.1 million albums -- more than soundtrack, Latin, jazz and classical recordings.

Onward, Christian marketers

Games, books and comics are other sectors with a growing Christian presence, observed Business Week in a July 27 article posted on its Web site. The article quoted "insiders" who estimate the Christian gaming industry to be worth about $100 million in annual sales. So far this is less than 1% of the video-game market, but it is growing.

Christian board- and card-game sales also seem to be climbing, according to Business Week.

Behind this success is a growing interest in religion among today's youth. "They're more involved with their church," says Cynthia Engelke, manager of research and trends at the New York marketing consulting firm Youth Intelligence.

In the words of Financial Times columnist Richard Tomkins last July 30, U.S. youngsters are increasingly switching from Coke to Christ. "Put simply, Christianity is cool," Tomkins wrote. "Or that is the way it is being marketed: as a more exciting and meaningful alternative to mainstream culture's world of dull conformity, empty materialism and brands."

So far much of this trend is limited to the United States. Even so, there remains plenty of anti-Christian content, as any concerned parent can testify. However, as the media elites continue to reward morality-bashing films, it seems they are increasingly out of touch with the younger generations.

ZE04091802

Friday, September 17, 2004

Questionable Origins of the American Civil Liberties Union

The American Civil Liberties Union: Uncomfortable Truths About The Origins
Roderick T. Beaman | September 16 2004

Probably like most other libertarians, I have come to this philosophy from the Right end of the political spectrum. Over the years, I have been very critical and, I must admit hostile, to The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). That said, our movement must welcome all to our cause. We have been receiving interest also, for quite a while, from the Left end of the spectrum.
Many libertarians have found reason to work with ACLU on certain issues and there is no doubt that there is firm common ground on which we stand. In those matters, we can join them. I have been having some exchanges with members of two libertarian e-groups and decided to do some more intense study of ACLU. I wish I could say that this mollified my feelings but it made it worse. What I found out about its origins horrified me. It was the political goal of many of the founders of ACLU to destroy this country and everything it stood for.
ACLU was founded on January 19, 1920. It grew out of a predecessor group, The National Civil Liberties Bureau which in turn had grown out of the American Union Against Militarism, and a soiree that was held in New York City and attended by just about every radical from the thriving New York scene of the time. The founders numbered over 60 but the bulk of the work was assumed by the following core:
Roger Nash Baldwin - the founding, long time, director of ACLU. Born to wealth, at the time of the founding, he was deeply involved in the communist movement. As late as 1935, he gave a speech stating that his political vision was communist. During the 1940s, Baldwin would participate in the purging of communists from ACLU, against a lot of opposition, and, in the 1950s, endorsed the work of Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
Norman Thomas - a Presbyterian minister and radical socialist who advocated the total abolition of capitalism. He was also a eugenicist who warned against the excessive reproduction of undesirables. Thomas was a six time Socialist Party presidential candidate. Also a committed pacifist, he joined Charles Lindbergh's American First Committee to keep us out of World War II. Then as now, politics made very strange bedfellows. He joined Baldwin in the 1940s purge of communists from ACLU.
John Haynes Holmes - a Unitarian minister, a pacifist, socialist and also a founder of The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
L. Hollingsworth Wood - a Quaker, pacifist and a co-founder of the Urban League.. I could find nothing that indicated his politics.
John Nevin Sayre - an ordained Episcopal minister, Sayre was a pacifist and believed that Jesus Christ was also. I could discern no other political agenda. Sayre was likely the most sincere of ACLU's founders.
The following is a random selection of others who were among the founders:
Crystal Eastman - pacifist, socialist and feminist. She had been active as a supporter of the radical International Workers of the World (I.W.W.), a radical group with very strong ties to communism. She would have been in the core group but for an illness at the time of ACLU's inception.
Helen Keller - a communist. This astonished me. Libertarians have long maintained that you can't believe what you learn from government sponsored schools and Hollywood. Never was that better illustrated than in the case of Helen Keller. 'The Miracle Worker' told us that she was a great teacher and struggled after being left blind and deaf from a childhood fever. For that, she must be admired.
But during the early 1920s, she wrote and spoke flatteringly about the two competing and emerging German variations of socialism, the national socialism of Adolf Hitler and international revolutionary socialism, or communism.
Radicalized at Radcliffe, she addressed others, as she was often addressed, as 'Comrade'. Ironically, under the eugenics of German National Socialism, Keller would likely have been judged as flawed and exterminated for having been so vulnerable to have been left damaged by her illness.
Elizabeth Flynn Gurley - a communist, she later became chairman of CPUSA.
Felix Frankfurter - a social reformer, became interested in ACLU when pacifists and socialists were being harassed by the government. Frankfurter would later be appointed to the Supreme Court by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was known for judicial restraint and deference to the legislative and executive branches, which may have endeared him to FDR who had already steamrollered congress into obeisance. Later, this attitude would irritate liberals who looked to the courts for the furtherance of their causes.
John Dewey - radical socialist educator who believed that the function of the educational system was to train future agents for the goals of the state. His educational theories dominate our system today.
Clarence Darrow - lionized by Hollywood in 'Inherit The Wind' and the Left for defending teacher John Scopes for teaching evolution. I could find nothing about his politics other than that he was a social reformer. He was an agnostic.
Jane Addams - social activist, feminist, and pacifist. She was also a founder of the NAACP.
Upton Sinclair - socialist and author of many novels. He began his career by writing ethnic jokes and mini-novels. 'The Jungle' , a full novel, was an expose of disgusting conditions in the Chicago meat packing industry. It led to the Pure Food and Drug Act which established the FDA. Not even his supporters maintain that he produced anything of literary value. His stories were long on sensationalism and short on character and plot.
A. J. Muste - at the time, a communist who was committed to revolutionary politics. He later later became a Christian pacifist after a trip to the Soviet Union and a meeting with Leon Trotsky. Many associates maintained though that he never completely abandoned his attachment to Marxism.
Harry F. Ward - a lifetime communist, he authored "Soviet Democracy" and "Soviet Spirit," two pro-Communist books.
Albert DeSilver - radical socialist attorney who had worked with the I.W.W. He willed his entire fortune to ACLU.
This is the cast of characters; in a steering committee of five, one communist, two socialists and three pacifists. In a random selection of eleven additional members, four communists, five radical socialists, two pacifists, two feminists and two social reformers. It's not difficult to discern an ideologic tilt to the organization.
And it got worse afterwards. By the 1940s, so many ACLU members were communists and members of other radical and communist organizations that Roger Baldwin grew alarmed at the attention that American security agencies were focusing on it. Aided by others, such as Norman Thomas, he led a purge of communists from the top leadership.
It was indeed unfortunate that pacifists had to make common cause with communists and others at the time because their movement was forever tainted by it. Many communists agitated for pacifism to facilitate communist insurgencies across the world. For them it was a means to the end of accomplishing their Nirvana, the total subjugation of humanity to the communist jackboot.

'Weirdness' in the Workplace

Some weirdoes belong at work
Eccentrics whose behaviour is rooted in high performance and intellect should be accommodated and celebrated by their employers, JOHN PUTZIER writes
By John Putzier
UPDATED AT 12:51 PM EDT Friday, Sep 17, 2004

Which bathroom does a transsexual use? Is body odour protected by freedom of religion? Should someone be allowed to wear the same suit to work every day? What if your receptionist is also a stripper at night? What if your chief executive officer is one of her best patrons?

Weirdness, it seems, is becoming the norm in today's workplace. The challenge for organizations is to distinguish weird behaviour that is rooted in high performance/high intellect from that which is just annoying or even destructive. Then they should dedicate more time, money and other resources to designing organizations around the needs and values of the weird high performers.

But whatever happened to the good old days when people looked and acted normal, came to work every day, did their jobs, didn't rock the boat and stayed until retirement? Why has the world of work become so weird? Well, you could have seen it coming, if you understood Principle #1:

As goes the world, so goes the workplace

The workplace is a microcosm of society. In a nutshell, when you refer to the good old days when people were "normal" and the workplace was a sea of tranquillity, you are referring to the Age of the Organization Man (1950s and 60s). It was post-Second World War, and organizations were run by white men, managing other white men, in a command and control style. Getting ahead was a function of getting along, being easy to manage was a core competency, and teamwork was synonymous with harmony. Life was good (for white men).

Enter the Age of Diversity (the seventies and eighties). Forced diversity, that is. The Civil Rights Act and Equal Employment Opportunity in the United States, women's liberation, baby boomers entering the work force, and government regulation out the wazoo, all coming together to create chaos and confusion for the Organization Man. Workplaces were more diverse, but not more liberated. It was the birth of human resource management and compliance officers. Protected classes (such as women and minorities) were coming out of the woodwork, but the keys to the boardroom were still in the hands of the Organization Men.

Managing was no longer fun (or easy), and when you add recession and reductions in the work force, it was the perfect time and opportunity for the Organization Men to take early retirement incentive options.

The next societal trends that manifested themselves in the workplace were a combination of high-technology, redirected loyalties (to self and profession, rather than to a company), talent shortages, dot-coms, venture capitalists, employee owners and new-found freedoms and fun at work. This was the Age of the New Economy and expectations were high.

Suddenly companies were forced to hire talent (or just warm bodies) over anything else. Workers now had clout, not necessarily through position power, but through their perceived valuable expertise. For the first time in North American history, workers took control to transform and redefine the world of work. Then Bang: 9/11, recession, outsourcing, corporate scandals, consolidations and the dot-com bust combined to take the wind out of the sails of the free-agent nation. It's every man/woman for him/herself. But workers got a taste of freedom, fun and the financial rewards of sweat equity, and do not want to put the genie back in the bottle, which brings us to the Age of the Individual.

From An Army of One to reality TV to survival games to fashion to the revered eccentricities of our celebrities, the normalization of weirdness has begun. And that means new rules and Principle #2:

All workers are not created equal

We have transcended the legal definition of diversity (race, sex, national origin) to one of individuality. A weirdo is anyone not like you, which is why there are so many of them out there! We are no longer a melting pot. We're a tossed salad. You can't even tell by looking at someone if they are weird or not. It's not a look; it's an attitude.

This can be good news for an organization that values individual contribution. The freedoms and liberties that were introduced in the Age of the New Economy need not be abandoned, but they do need to be earned.

But, let's not fool ourselves. Not all the rights and privileges of society automatically transfer to the workplace. Freedom of expression, protections from search and seizure, and rights of privacy are not guaranteed nor required in the world of work. E-mail can be monitored; lockers and desks searched; behaviours can be managed.

The key to organizational success in the Age of the Individual requires understanding that not all "individuality" is valuable. Weirdness rooted in genius is different than weirdness that is purely for the sake of individual expression or rebellion. There is a difference between the eccentricities of an Einstein and the employee whose lack of personal hygiene knocks you over. There's a difference between a scientist with numerous patents who asks for ultimate flextime and the high-maintenance, average performer who wants an office facing East because her feng shui consultant says so.

For organizations to thrive in the Age of the Individual, they must become meritocracies, that is, where one's success is rooted in his/her value and contribution. There are three categories of weirdoes in the workplace. Those who should be accommodated and even celebrated (geniuses and high performers), those who can be tolerated (decent hard-working people who are just annoying, but cause no harm), and those who must be terminated (whose outlandish behaviour overshadows their value to the organization), and they are all defined by a cost-benefit premise I call the Weird-Worth ratio. The more you are worth, the more you can be weird, which leads to Principle #3:

Discrimination is good, it is right and it is necessary

If we are to transcend (philosophically) the traditional definition of diversity, we must also revisit the much-aligned concept of discrimination. The word discrimination got a bad rap during the Age of Diversity, but it cannot be an automatic conclusion that discrimination is always malicious or even wrong. As a manager, if you never discriminate, you are not a manager. The key, however, is to discriminate based upon relative value and performance. That kind of discrimination is not only good, it is right, and it is necessary in the Age of the Individual, and in a meritocracy. It's not an option. Workers cannot have it both ways. If you want a culture that celebrates its individuality, you must also assume the responsibility of making a valuable individual contribution.

Key to making a successful transition to a meritocracy is education. Educate your workers as to the performance criteria by which survival and success are measured, and that if individuality is to be a celebrated core value of your organization, then the individual must also be responsible for earning the right to be treated as an individual, to be a weirdo of worth! In the Age of the Organization Man, the organization took primary responsibility for workers' futures. They were highly paternalistic cultures. Keep your nose clean, and we'll take care of you. In the Age of the New Economy, workers started to take control of their own destinies. However, in the Age of the Individual, it is incumbent upon both the organization and the individual to take responsibility for tapping their natural weirdness.

A high-performing weirdo of worth has found the unique intersection of his interests (that which s/he loves), her abilities (that which s/he does better than most) and the market (that for which there is a demand). And when that happens, the organization owes it to such rare breeds to accommodate and to celebrate them. And anything the organization can do to facilitate that discovery is a win-win until we have attained Principle #4:

The more weirdoes there are, the fewer there are

Ultimately in the Age of the Individual, and in a high-performing meritocracy, the concept of weirdoes in the workplace becomes relative. In other words, when weirdness becomes the norm, it is no longer perceived as weird. So, the more weirdoes you hire, the fewer you have. It may sound rather utopian, but it is the right direction in which to aim if you and your organization wish to thrive in the Age of the Individual. Now go Get Weird!

John Putzier is the president of a U.S. human resource strategy firm. His newest book is Weirdos in the Workplace! The New Normal. . . Thriving in the Age of the Individual.

Tapping your natural weirdness

You're good at something; you love it, and they pay you for it! It doesn't get any better than this! These are the people that every employer wants to hire and are sometimes the "weirdoes in the workplace" who are cherished, i.e., the ones rooted in genius and high performance.

They have tapped their natural weirdness to the max, and life is good. They jump out of bed in the morning, or maybe even in the middle of the night, anxious to take on another day.

A key point is to not think of yourself as a job title or even in terms of a particular occupation. In other words, you are not just an accountant. You may be an accountant with strong sales and influence skills. You are not just an engineer. You may be an engineer with a flair for the creative and innovative. Once you have identified your abilities and interests, you can merge them into a powerful, and real, personal statement.

Abilities and interests are transferable across multiple occupations and industries. Accountants can go into sales. They can sell accounting software, financial services or even sell themselves as independent consultants. Engineers can go into creative fields such as graphic design or visual arts.Those who are multitalented with diverse interests have more options. The larger the target, the greater your potential for hitting it. And once you find the intersection of your abilities, your interests and the market, you will be on the road to tapping your natural weirdness. You will be a weirdo to be loved and richly rewarded!

Fertility Clinics Vary in Embryo-Disposal Methods

Fertility Clinics Vary on Embryo Disposal
Fri Sep 17, 7:50 AM ET
By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writer

PHILADELPHIA - The nation's fertility clinics vary widely when it comes to how they perform one of the most delicate aspects of their jobs: disposing of unused frozen human embryos that were created to help infertile women become pregnant.
In a survey believed to be the first of its kind, 217 in vitro fertilization clinics across the country described the variety of methods they use to dispose of the frozen clusters of cells, which are the size of a dot and incapable of living outside a womb.
The reverence that some clinics gave to the task surprised researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and Rutgers University.
Seven clinics said they performed a quasi-religious ceremony, including a prayer, for each embryo they destroyed.
Seven others took the technically unnecessary step of culturing the cells in a lab dish, then allowing them to multiply on their own, briefly, before they perish.
Four insisted that, whatever method was chosen for disposal, the patient be present when it happens. Others barred them from being in the room, or recommended that they be uninvolved.
University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Arthur Caplan said the survey results, published last month in the journal Politics and the Life Sciences, show that the clinics have a level of moral sensitivity unrealized by the public.
"I don't think anyone who deals with these frozen embryos considers them to be persons," Caplan said. "But I think that they feel they are deserving of respect ... They see the potential for life in this material."
Other studies have estimated that there are about 400,000 frozen embryos in storage in the United States. Each has fewer than 100 cells.
Some religious groups, including the Roman Catholic church, have condemned both the creation of embryos in a laboratory and their destruction if they go unused, saying children should only be created by sex between a married man and woman.
In 2001, President Bush said he would no longer allow federal tax dollars to be used to make discarded embryos available for stem cell research.
Of the 217 clinics that responded to the survey, 33 said they were willing to create extra embryos as part of the in vitro fertilization process, but were not willing to dispose of them.
Almost all were willing to permanently preserve the frozen embryos in cold storage. About three in four clinics allowed patients to donate them to be used by other couples. Sixty percent allowed them to be donated for research.
Four clinics said they gave the thawed embryos back to their clients.
Dr. Stephen Somkuti, medical director of the IVF program at Abington Reproductive Medicine, said ethics policies at the Abington hospital, where his clinic is based, bar it from destroying any embryos itself.
Some patients simply toss the embryos out themselves, Somkuti said. Others take the small straws containing the cells home with them.
"Some people just decide to have us keep them in the freezer ad infinitum because they can't come to terms with what to do with them," Somkuti said.
Seven clinics, or about three percent of all that participated in the study, said that because of religious or ethical concerns, they would not create more embryos than they intended to implant, and thus had no cells to freeze or destroy.
Dr. Vincent A. Pellegrini, a fertility doctor in West Reading, Pa., said he wrestled with the issue for two years before deciding that destroying surplus embryos would be akin to "throwing away human life."
"It just wasn't an option," Pellegrini said. "Once we have a dividing embryo, it is human material I can't discard."
The policy poses an additional burden for patients. It requires that the clinic sometimes implant more developing embryos in a woman's body than they generally need to ensure a successful pregnancy, meaning that the women carry an increased risk of having twins, triplets or quadruplets.
Pellegrini said some patients decide to go elsewhere because of his policies. But he also attracts some patients who share his views.
"One couple came from the middle of New Jersey because morally, they had problems with it, and they couldn't find a clinic closer to them that could satisfy their concerns."

Thursday, September 16, 2004

'Biased' UN Population Report Attacked

Date: 2004-09-16
Ignoring Signs of a Demographic Winter
Journalist Warns of Bias in U.N. Population Fund Report

ROME, SEPT. 16, 2004 (Zenit.org).- A United Nations Population Fund report, published a decade after the 1994 Cairo conference on population and development, is "totally ideological," warns an expert on demographic issues.

Riccardo Cascioli, journalist of the Italian newspaper Avvenire and author of numerous books on demography, says that UNFPA's objective is to promote abortion in the world.

The report predicts that the world's population will have increased by almost 40% by 2050, to 8.9 billion inhabitants.

Entitled "State of World Population 2004," the report sees in the demographic increase an obstacle for development and for the environment.

In this interview with ZENIT, Cascioli, who attended the 1994 Cairo conference, talks about the ideas hidden behind UNFPA's projects and report.

Q: How do you evaluate this report?

Cascioli: It is a totally ideological report. It is incredible that, when describing the state of the population in the world, no mention is made of the main demographic problem we are experiencing today: namely, the rapid aging of the population.

And this is also the case in countries where the consequences will be even more dramatic because of the absence of social security: pensions, health service, etc…

On the contrary, UNFPA continues to engage in propaganda on the need to reduce even more the fertility rates, stating that this will foster development.

Reality demonstrates the contrary. Suffice it to think of Africa, where there has been a decrease in the fertility rate from 6.65 to 4.91 per woman, yet over the past 10 years poverty in the continent has increased by 43%.

The truth is that the only interest shown by UNFPA is to promote abortion as a fundamental human right, something that Cairo did not achieve 10 years ago, but which is an increasingly explicit objective.

Q: We have gone from the "demographic explosion" to the "demographic winter." What has happened in these 10 years, since Cairo 1994?

Cascioli: The much-feared demographic explosion has always been an instrumental argument to achieve universal consensus on topics that concern certain elites, namely, birth control.

The most farsighted demographers, even 10 years ago, were skeptical about these alarms. In any case, reality has been in charge of demonstrating that they were unfounded.

It is true that the decrease in fertility has gone beyond all predictions, for reasons that are yet to be adequately investigated. But I repeat: The problem is that at the level of international agencies the real demographic problems are not addressed -- preferring instead to promote an ideological agenda.

This leads to investing substantial resources in policies that not only are useless, but dangerous for two reasons: They take away funds from real aid to development and aggravate the tendency of the aging of the population.

It must be added, moreover, that especially in some regions, these policies create dangerous social imbalances, as is the case of China, where there are 120 men for every 100 women, while the average relation is 106-107 men for 100 women.

Q: The U.S. administration, which in 1994 was totally opposed to the Holy See, seems at present to support programs in defense of life and the family. What has happened in U.S. policy-making?

Cascioli: Today, Bush is accused by UNFPA and pro-abortion organizations of killing women because he has withdrawn financial support from UNFPA.

In reality, the White House's decision is based on obvious data which shows how this U.N. agency and other NGOs [nongovernmental organizations] support programs that provide coercive abortion, especially in China.

In fact, Bush has done no more than apply the Program of Action approved by the Cairo conference which in Article 8.25 states clearly that "abortion can in no case be considered as a means of family planning."

Today we must wake up to the fact that the money from our taxes goes to promote abortion, including coercive abortion, in the world, with the label "aid to development."

Governments Urged to Watch For Pro-Abortion UN Agenda

Date: 2004-09-16
Governments Urged to Watch Agenda of U.N. Agencies
Vatican Officials Say Pro-abortion Efforts Violate International Pacts

ROME, SEPT. 16, 2004 (Zenit.org).- A Vatican official appealed to governments to remind them of their duty to denounce U.N. agencies that go against international agreements by promoting abortion.

The appeal by Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, was supported by Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Holy See's permanent observer to the U.N. offices in Geneva.

It took place after the presentation Wednesday of a report of the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA).

Against numerous studies that point to a worrying "demographic winter," the UNFPA report continues to predict a "demographic explosion" and sees births as an obstacle for development and the environment.

Since the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, UNFPA and other U.N. agencies have used demographic data to try to justify the implementation of abortion in the world.

"Governments have the duty to denounce the UNFPA and other U.N. agencies that violate the Program of Action signed in Cairo, trying to promote free abortion," said Cardinal Martino, who for 16 years was the papal representative at the United Nations in New York.

In statements to a publication of the European Center of Studies on Population, Environment and Development, the cardinal recalled that in Cairo the Holy See formed a front together with 40 other countries "to block the attempt to introduce for the first time the right to abortion in an international document."

"It must be remembered that the Clinton administration, which was represented in Cairo by Vice President Al Gore, defended this point with determination and radicalness," Cardinal Martino said.

"But in the end we achieved consensus and Article 8.25 of the approved Program of Action states explicitly that in no case can abortion be considered as a means of family planning," he continued.

"Since then, every international conference on sustainable development, up to the last one held in Johannesburg in 2002, has witnessed the attempt of the usual pressure groups which seek to reintroduce the question of abortion in different ways," the cardinal added.

Among these groups are various U.N. agencies, said the cardinal. He appealed to governments' sense of responsibility: "Funds cannot be allocated to multilateral agencies and then be disinterested in the way they are used."

"Governments must control the use that is made of their citizens' money and they have the duty to denounce any violation of Article 8.25 of Cairo's Program of Action, according to which, no U.N. agency can allow the promotion of abortion," Cardinal Martino said.

"For this reason, the Holy See has for some years withdrawn its own contribution to the United Nations Children's Fund. It must be remembered that these organizations have only executive power, and cannot go beyond the mandate that has been given to them in documents signed by the governments," he explained.

For his part, Archbishop Tomasi, the Holy See's observer to the United Nations in Geneva, said in statements published by CESPAS magazine that the Cairo conference "established new philosophical foundations on which to base global policies."

This view sees in the "excess of population the primary cause of poverty." In this way, he continued, "the natural law has been canceled and the value and dignity of the person has become something secondary."

What comes first in this philosophy is "well-being, beginning with the economic, and the most exacerbated individualism, namely, a conception of the person shut in on himself, without any other reference than himself," Archbishop Tomasi said.

"This has conditioned all kinds of social and political programs," he added. "Religions themselves become something acceptable if they fit in this horizon, otherwise, they become obstacles that must be eliminated."

For agencies in charge of implementing the Cairo conclusions, despite the fact that "in their documents they talk about the struggle against poverty, their real concern is not development, but birth control, which they present as the way to facilitate development," the archbishop said.

On the contrary, the papal representative said, "underdeveloped countries are not necessarily very populated. What is more, some are lacking in population. Moreover, the most important resource for development is people's creativity; experience shows that an aging and conservative population is incapable of innovation, of growth."

He added: "To promote development, other important factors are necessary: the education of the human resources, the distribution of resources which is often hindered by political power, access to products of international markets."

Raelians to Pose in Playboy

RAEL And Three Raelians In The Next Playboy Issue
Press Release - Raelian Movement
usa@rael.org
9-16-4

RAEL and three Raelians in the next Playboy issue!

We are pleased to announce that an illustrated feature profiling RAEL and three beautiful and sensual Raelians will be published and announced on the cover of the October issue of the famous Playboy magazine.
Nudity and spirituality... incompatible you may say? But let us not forget that the philosophy of the Raelians is the only one that embraces sexual freedom and nudity.
The magazine is scheduled to be in the newsstands on September 15th, shortly before the Raelian monthly gathering which will take place on Sunday September 19th in Montreal, and which promises to be a very special event. Indeed, the three Raelian women who posed in October Playboy including: Shizue, personal assistant of Rael - Sophie, RAEL's life companion for the past 13 years - and Marina, daughter of CLONAID's CEO Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, will be on location for those who wish to have their issue autographed. In addition, they will be more than happy to tell the press about their experiences and have their photos taken with their admirers.
RAEL will be attending this event and will speak to us on the topic of "Nudity and spirituality." He will also take this opportunity to praise Mr. Hugh Hefner, Playboy's founder, and congratulate him for his commendable actions aimed at breaking sexual taboos and for actively taking part in the evolution of lifestyles. For all these achievements, Rael will award him the title of "Honorary Priest". Mr. Hefner celebrated the 50th Anniversary of his controversial magazine last December 2003.

TV Sex Influences Teens

Sexual Content On TV Spurs Teens Into Action
By Amanda Gardner
HealthDay Reporter
9-16-4

(HealthDayNews) -- Teenagers who view sexual content on television, even if it only involves characters talking about sex, are twice as likely to start having intercourse in the ensuing year compared with peers who do not watch such content.
Sexual content on TV was also more likely to hasten adolescents' movement from one "base" to another, in other words, from kissing to breast fondling to genital touching and on to oral sex, new research found.
"Regardless of which level kids were at the beginning of this study, watching more sex on TV was associated with a much higher probability of moving up along the continuum," said Rebecca Collins, senior author of the study, which appears in the September issue of Pediatrics.
"The effect was strongest for kids moving into the genital category [known in earlier generations as "heavy petting"]. They were about twice as likely to make that leap if they watched a lot of sex on TV, compared to their peers. The effect was weakest for kids moving in the very first stage," added Collins, a senior behavioral scientist at the Rand Corp. The only effect that was stronger was for those who engaged in actual intercourse, Collins added.
She said she was surprised by the magnitude of the effect. "Just making small reductions to what kids are exposed to could make a significant difference in how quickly they develop sexually," she said.
According to the journal report, 46 percent of all high school students in the United States have had sexual intercourse. For every four sexually active teenagers, one case of a sexually transmitted disease (STD) is diagnosed. The rate of teen pregnancy in the United States is among the highest for all industrial countries. Both unplanned pregnancies and STDs are more common among individuals who start sexual activity earlier. The author also stated that most sexually active teens say they wish they had waited longer to have sex.
And while about two-thirds of programs currently on television contain sexual content, from talking to doing, there is little research on the subject.
Collins and her colleagues surveyed 1,792 adolescents aged 12 to 17 from across the nation about their TV viewing habits and sexual experience. The participants were surveyed twice, about one year apart.
While factors such as age, having older friends, getting lower grades and rule-breaking behavior were all associated with initiating sexual intercourse, television had the strongest effect.
Adolescents who watched the most sexual content-oriented TV at the beginning of the study were more likely to initiate intercourse during the following year. They were also more likely to advance in their "making out" stages.
However, the researchers also found that black youths who watched more depictions of sexual risks or safety measures were less likely to initiate sexual intercourse in the next year.
A child behavioral expert viewed the results of the study as an opportunity for what she termed a "teachable moment."
"For parents, this isn't necessarily a negative message, because there is other research showing that programs with sexual content provide good opportunities for parents to initiate conversations with children about these topics," said Suzanne Ryan, a research associate with Child Trends in Washington, D.C.
"This is an important study because it fills a very important hole in what we know," added Bill Albert, spokesman for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy in Washington, D.C.
The problem could be attacked from a number of different directions, including getting kids to watch less TV and persuading the TV industry to show less sex, or at least to show the potential consequences of sex.
"If the media is a powerful force in shaping the social script for adolescents, it is also true that the media can be a force for good," Albert said. "I think you are seeing some major media outlets stepping up to the plate and addressing the sexual issue in a more responsible way."
"When we did a survey last year, it was very clear that a huge percentage of teens and adults say that they wish the media showed more or talked more about the consequences of sex, so there is a great support for these sorts of responsible messages," he added.

More information
For more on kids and TV, visit the American Academy of Pediatrics (www.medem.com ).

SOURCES: Rebecca Collins, Ph.D., senior behavioral scientist, Rand Corp., Santa Monica, Calif.; Bill Albert, spokesman, National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, Washington, D.C.; Suzanne Ryan, Ph.D., research associate, Child Trends, Washington, D.C.; September 2004 Pediatrics

Washington Seeks to 'Wiretap' the Internet

Wiretapping the Web
A literal reading of electronic eavesdropping laws—coupled with a new FCC proposal—may make it easier for Washington to watch you online
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Brian Braiker
Newsweek
Updated: 2:18 p.m. ET Aug. 13, 2004

Aug. 13 - We’ve been told since the dawn of the Internet that the e-mail we send and receive on company time is fair game for our employers to monitor. Many took for granted, though, that e-mail sent from private accounts was just that: private. How naive.
As if hacking worries weren’t enough, two recent legal developments have raised further fears among Web privacy advocates in the United States. In one case, the Federal Communications Commission voted 5-0 last week to prohibit businesses from offering broadband or Internet phone service unless they provide Uncle Sam with backdoors for wiretapping access. And in a separate decision last month, a federal appeals court decided that e-mail and other electronic communications are not protected under a strict reading of wiretap laws. Taken together, these decisions may make it both legally and technologically easier to wiretap Internet communications, some legal experts told NEWSWEEK. “All the trends are toward easier to tap,” says Kevin Bankston, an attorney at the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation.
The FCC’s plans to require Internet-based phone and broadband services to be engineered for easy wiretapping is a response to a request from the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies. The proposal would bring Internet-based phone providers in line with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which requires “telecommunications” carriers to make their networks wiretap-friendly. The FCC says the government must still go through all of the necessary legal steps to obtain the authority to wiretap; CALEA simply makes it technologically easier to do. “This will not have an effect on whether there is appropriate lawful authority—that remains the same,” says FCC spokesman Julius Knapp. “All this really is addressing is whether the carrier is required to have the capability to provide the information that’s covered by a court order.”
Then there's U.S. v. Councilman. In January 1998, an online bookseller called Interloc offered e-mail accounts to its dealer clients. The idea was that by secretly copying messages Interloc customers received from rival Amazon.com, the booksellers could gain a market advantage. Totally illegal, right? Not according to the federal court of appeals decision. Bradford C. Councilman, then an Interloc supervisor, claimed he was innocent of wiretapping because the law did not apply: since the messages had been stored on Interloc’s servers while they were being processed, they were not intercepted in transit. The court agreed with this literal reading of the wiretap laws. “We believe that the language of the statute makes clear that Congress meant to give lesser protection to electronic communications than wire and oral communication,” the court wrote in its decision. Under a 1986 amendment to the 1968 Wiretap Act, companies are banned from monitoring customer communications—but not from reading stored customer communications.
Is this outrageous? “This difference between stored communications and more transitory [communications] is a pretty refined one that really was ill-fitting at the time it was passed,” says Jonathan Zittrain, codirector of Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society. “It’s even worse now.” The framers of the law, he says, wanted to make it harder to conduct ongoing surveillance than undertake a one-time intrusion. “The Councilman decision sort of puts that on its end, because it says you can do a series of one-shot intrusions that amount to the same as surveillance—but still treat it as merely a one-shot deal.” The Department of Justice, which prosecuted the case, did not return NEWSWEEK's calls asking for comment.
As it is, the wiretap laws have exceptions for the interception of unencrypted or unscrambled radio signals. So any easy-to-intercept e-mail you may send from your Wi-Fi-enabled laptop at your friendly neighborhood coffee shop is treated as a radio signal and therefore may not have the same protections under the law that wire and oral communications do. When the EFF’s Bankston looks at the FCC ruling side by side with Councilman, he sees the former as making it technologically easier to wiretap Internet communications and the latter as lowering legal barriers. “Building the infrastructure for a surveillance state is not good public hygiene,” he quips.
Not all lawyers see the situation in such bleak terms. Susan Crawford, an assistant professor at New York's Cardozo Law School who writes extensively on the FCC, isn’t quite buying this conspiracy theory. “I’m not convinced that either Councilman or CALEA changes any individual’s privacy online,” she says. She does, however, agree that the Councilman case highlighted a weakness in the current law, adding that the recent developments could be seen “as part of the trend at the FBI and the Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Agency of asserting a great deal of control over the regulatory process.”
For some privacy experts, that’s the real question: Is it the FCC’s mandate to aid law enforcement? Civil-liberties concerns aside, building a backdoor through which the FBI can monitor communications also inserts a soft spot for hackers. “To the extent that there may be tension in the law,” argues the FCC's Knapp, “it’s suggested that with that tension in place, the appropriate public interest lies in ensuring that public safety has access to the tools it needed.”
There may be more developments to come. In March, the same month the FBI requested that the FCC expand CALEA, the commission released a “Notice on Proposed Rulemaking,” which announced plans to look at whether and how the FCC should begin regulating the Internet. Crawford points to its 155th footnote, which says the FCC could, if it wanted to, place tariffs on online newspapers or require that online retailers be able to process 911 emergency calls. “It’s sort of a lighthearted footnote,” she says. “But for me it suggests the FCC has power over all online services and it’s just going to decide what services it’s going to act on. This is a turning pointing in the history of the Internet because telecom agencies all over the world are looking at their very broad enabling statutes and saying ‘Someone needs to be in charge of this Wild, Wild West'.” And providers are falling in line with the FCC, she says, because the certainty of regulated business minimizes risk. Or, as an America Online spokesman puts it, “We comply with law-enforcement agencies that bring a legally binding request to us, and we cooperate with them. We’ve always done that.”
Which is why Crawford says it’s time for the FCC, an independent government organization accountable to Congress, to engage in a public discourse if it plans on regulating the Web. “What we need right now is a national conversation about whether and how we’re going to regulate Internet services.” But even from where she sits, Crawford admits that the question of “whether” is already being answered in the affirmative. It’s the “how” that concerns her.

British Documentary Traces 'Illuminati' Insider

British TV documentary traces Illuminati insider to Hertford
Hertfordshire Mercury | September 16 2004

A SINISTER secret society said to control the world's governments has members living in Hertford, according to a documentary to be aired on Sky One.
The Mercury can exclusively reveal that the mysterious sect, the Illuminati, who are believed to be bankers, power brokers and politicians, have a base in the town.
Formed in Bavaria in 1776, the group is said to have high-powered members including George W Bush and his presidential rival John Kerry, who joined a branch called the Skull and Bones, while at Yale University.
Conspiracy theorist's claim that the society is "bent on world domination" in a shadowy behind the scenes bid to control us.
As part of Sky's series on conspiracy theories, journalist Danny Wilson met with Hertford man and insider Tim Acheson, in a bid to meet an Illuminatus.
Tim has a family connection with the secret sect the Knights Templar, a powerful society dating back to the Crusades, which has many links with East Herts and is said to know where the Holy Grail could be.
But he denied a link with former US secretary of state Dean Acheson, a well known Templar, who was in President Truman's inner circle during the 1950s.
Cryptically he told the Mercury: "I cannot talk about my family connections. The older members of secret societies want to keep them secret, whereas some of the new blood are a bit more open.
"I do know two members of the Illuminati who live here, but I must protect their identities.
"There are powerful and dangerous forces at work here and I cannot risk getting on the wrong side of them."
The Mercury were given a sneak preview of the show The Illuminati, Our Secret Masters, which will be aired on Sky One at 9pm on Thursday.
Tim, a reporter for conspiracy theory website www.theinsider.org, is seen driving through Hertford with the TV presenter.
They drive to a deserted industrial estate near the town and wait for the shadowy figure to turn up - but Wilson begins to think that he's been led on a wild goose chase.
Finally Tim returns to tell him that his contact has "got cold feet" and has backed off meeting the press.
Speaking to the Mercury this week Tim said: "It is very difficult to get them to reveal themselves as you can understand but I hope that it may happen at a later date.
And he promised to reveal more of Hertford's hidden secrets.
He said: "Hertford is more important as centre of mystery and intrigue, both historically and contemporarily, than most people realize."
The programme is one in a four-part series on conspiracy theories showing at the same time every Thursday in September.

Former Ontario Premier Swears at Volunteers

Sep. 16, 2004. 06:05 AM
Tempers flare as Harris votes
Dispute over I.D. behind brouhaha
Tory volunteers get a nasty earful
RICHARD BRENNAN
QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU

Former premier Mike Harris is being accused of raising a ruckus by swearing at volunteers when he voted in an advance poll ahead of Saturday's provincial Conservative leadership election.

Harris has been given until next Monday to apologize or face possible expulsion from the Vaughan-King-Aurora Conservative Riding Association. He also faces a lawsuit launched by riding president Gabe Spoletini.

"It was the kind of language you would expect from a sailor, not a former premier," Spoletini said. Spoletini said the incident occurred Monday when Harris, who lives in Woodbridge with his girlfriend Laura Maguire, became irate over being asked for the required two pieces of identification at the advance poll, including one that showed his address and signature.

"I heard yelling ... and I heard him say `Just give me the f------ ballot' and then he grabbed it from the woman who was the DRO (the deputy returning officer)," Spoletini said.

"I said, `What's going on here?' He turned around and said, `You can challenge my f------ ballot, you jackass.' I said, `Don't be an a------' and he said to me `You're the biggest a------ of them all.'"

Harris was unavailable for comment yesterday.

Harris spokesperson Deb Hutton disputed Spoletini's version of events, saying the ex-premier did supply two pieces of identification but was asked for a third.

"I think someone, quite frankly, chose to create a little mischief and asked for additional identification, which he didn't have," she said. Hutton said she did not know if Harris swore at the three women working the advance poll. Other sources confirmed that he did.


Spoletini said Harris has until Monday to provide a written apology or face "legal action."

Meanwhile, candidates met yesterday for the final debate in the race to succeed Conservative Leader Ernie Eves. MPP Frank Klees (Oak Ridges) sparred with rivals John Tory, the ex-Rogers Cable president, and MPP Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax) over health care.

With Files From Robert Benzie

Kenyan Police Regularly Find Aborted Fetuses

Abortion Babies Shock Police
The Nation (Nairobi)
NEWS
September 16, 2004
Posted to the web September 15, 2004
By Stephen Muiruri
Nairobi

At least three foetuses are found in various parts of Nairobi every day,
according to a senior police officer.

The bodies are usually left in city streets and garbage sites in
estates, provincial police chief King'ori Mwangi said, yesterday.

In the latest incident, yesterday, dogs dragged a foetus to the Ministry
of Agriculture headquarters and started feasting on it, as employees
watched in horror.

Officers from the Kilimani police station were called in and took the
remains to the City Mortuary.

Mr Mwangi later commented: "It's a disturbing crime. Foetuses are being
found in dumps all over the city.

"Our officers are traumatised. They have to collect two or three
abandoned foetuses every day."

Last Thursday, police and the provincial administration found 20 babies
at a garbage site in Eastleigh, near the Nairobi River.

Those arrested include the driver of a pick-up truck found off-loading
black polythene bags at the site and the owner of a private clinic. The
conductor escaped.

Police officers also seized the medical equipment, waste and records of
various clinics at the site.

Mr Mwangi said 11 city clinics are under investigation after their names
were cited in abortion scandals.

The city police chief said they had taken to the Government Chemist
samples from the 20 foetuses for DNA tests. "We believe the results will
help us track down the mothers and charge them in court," Mr Mwangi
added.

He asked churches to help bury the remains of the 20 foetuses still
lying at the morgue.

"We have obtained burial permits, but we want the remains given a decent
burial," he said.

Mr Mwangi asked Nairobians to give information on doctors and clinics
involved in illegal abortions.

Nine of the 20 bodies found on Thursday were discovered by street boys
scavenging in the garbage dump.

Police suspected the bodies were collected from various city estates.

Wednesday, September 15, 2004

Quebec Justice Official Wants Easier Seizures of 'Crime Spoils'

Make it easier to seize crime spoils: Quebec AG
Last Updated Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:37:16 EDT

QUEBEC CITY - Quebec's Attorney General is pushing for changes to the
Criminal Code to make it easier to collect the proceeds of crime.

Walter Stadnick, left, and Donald Stockford in the prisoner's box.
The request comes as Quebec Justice officials pursue millions of dollars
from two convicted members of the Hells Angels.

Quebec Attorney General Jacques Dupuis says putting convicted gangsters
behind bars isn't enough. He wants their money too.

"So the message to those people is: You won't get away with it," Dupuis says.

This week, government lawyers are trying persuade a court to order two
convicted Hells Angels members to hand over $1 million each.

Walter Stadnick and Donald Stockford were sentenced to 20 years in prison
for their involvement in Montreal's biker wars. Financial records seized
from the Hells Angels show the two men made more than $11 million in drug
profits.

Under existing law, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt
the earnings came from crime.

Dupuis wants the law to be changed to put the burden of proof on the side
of the accused instead.

"We would reverse that so that the individual would have to prove that he
acquired the goods in a legitimate way instead of us proving that he
acquired it with the proceeds of crime," Dupuis says.

Dupuis will ask his federal counterpart to make the necessary changes to
the Criminal Code.

While the federal Justice Department indicates it is open to exploring the
idea, a spokesperson says officials do have concerns that such changes
could violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Written by CBC News Online staff

Chretien Told Sponsorship Program Was 'His Baby'

Chretien told at start that sponsorship was his baby
Jim Brown
Canadian Press
Wednesday, September 15, 2004

OTTAWA (CP) - Former prime minister Jean Chretien was told at the start of
the federal sponsorship program that he was ultimately responsible for how
the money was spent and who got it.

Documents tabled Tuesday at a public inquiry show that Jocelyne Bourgon,
then clerk of the privy council and the country's top civil servant, wrote
to Chretien in the fall of 1997 to sort out the lines of authority.
Bourgon noted that the public works minister - then Alfonso Gagliano -
would be accountable for financial and administrative procedures under the
program.

But because Chretien had personally signed documents authorizing the
expenditure of funds, he also had a role.

That included not just broad policy matters, but also selection of the
events to be funded, wrote Bourgon.

"It is your office which determines to which projects the monies are
directed. Should questions arise in the House of Commons, for example, on
the initiatives supported by these funds, you might have to respond."

The question of who called the political shots has been at the heart of
the long-running controversy over the sponsorship program.

The documents tabled Tuesday were the clearest indication yet of
Chretien's role in the creation of the program.

There was no evidence, however, that the former prime minister was aware
of any funding abuses or other wrongdoing.

Nor was it clear whether Chretien retained political authority over
sponsorship for the full life of the program, which continued for years.

Bourgon asked, in her memo of Sept. 30 1997, what kind of support services
Chretien would need "to fulfil your accountability."

But she also asked whether he wanted to retain authority or shift it to
one of his ministers.

There was no indication of a response from Chretien in the documents, and
government officials weren't asked to elaborate in oral testimony Tuesday.

Ottawa eventually spent $250 million to sponsor a variety of cultural,
sporting and other events, with the aim of raising the federal profile in
Quebec and fighting separatism.

Auditor General Sheila Fraser has estimated that about $100 million went
in fees and commissions to middlemen with close Liberal ties.

Justice John Gomery was appointed by Prime Minster Paul Martin in February
to head the inquiry into what went wrong.

In testimony Tuesday, Jim Judd, the current deputy minister at Treasury
Board, the federal financial watchdog, initially suggested that Chretien's
authority over sponsorship was limited to general policy and overall
spending.

Under questioning by commission counsel Neil Finkelstein - and in light of
the Bourgon memo - Judd later modified that view.

He acknowledged that Chretien apparently had a "measure of accountability"
for more detailed matters, including selection of projects to be funded.

Another memo tabled Tuesday indicated senior bureaucrats were upset that
Jean Pelletier, then Chretien's chief of staff, was poaching on their
turf.

George Anderson, then deputy minister of intergovernmental affairs, noted
in February 1998 that Pelletier had contacted Treasury Board to authorize
the transfer of $17 million from a special national unity reserve fund for
use in the sponsorship program.

In the past, Treasury Board had "'never taken orders directly from the
Prime Minister's Office" on national unity matters, Anderson wrote.

He also appeared uneasy that the money was destined for the Public Works
Department, which handled day-to-day operation of the sponsorship program.

There had long been concern, said Anderson, about a Public Works habit of
requesting "large amounts of money from the (national unity) reserve
without providing much information on the ends to which it planned to
direct such funds."

Testimony at separate hearings by the Commons public accounts committee in
the spring indicated Chuck Guite, the Public Works bureaucrat running the
sponsorship program, was in frequent contact with the prime minister's
chief of staff.

Pelletier acknowledged that he sometimes discussed specific projects with
Guite. But he insisted he always left the final decision to the
appropriate bureaucrats on which events to fund.

Pelletier went on to become chairman of Via Rail after he left Chretien's
office. He was fired from the Via post by Martin earlier this year.

Cabinet documents made public in February showed that Chretien personally
signed the spending authorizations to launch the sponsorship program.

That was because the start-up money - in two chunks of $17 million for
fiscal 1996-97 and $18.8 million for 1997-98 - came out of the special
national unity reserve.

That fund was controlled by the Privy Council Office, the bureaucratic
nerve centre of the government, which works closely with the prime
minister.

© The Canadian Press 2004

Website Advocates Arson, Violence Against Churches

Pro-Family Spokesman: Anti-Religion Site Crosses Line With Criminal Content
By Allie Martin and Jenni Parker
September 14, 2004

(AgapePress) - A Christian faith and family research center is calling for action against the operators of a website that advocates an orchestrated campaign of arson and violence against churches and religious people.

The Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society is outraged over the "ChurchArson.com" website, which describes Christianity and Judaism as "forms of mind control" and calls for enemies of religious faith to burn down houses of worship. The site's author also advocates the killing of true believers, saying he looks forward to the day when "the executions of die-hard Christians and Jews will commence."

Larry Jacobs, the Howard Center's vice president, says the religion-bashing Internet site is a sad commentary on the state of America and the way that people of faith are depicted by the anti-religious cultural elite. "There's been a number of movies that have depicted Christians as fools, hypocrites or villains," he says, not to mention "the news media telling us that evangelicals are fanatics."

With so much religion-bashing going on in the mainstream press and popular culture, Jacobs says, "It's not any wonder that there are some unstable people who would listen to all this media and go to the extreme of committing violence against Christians." To the family research analyst, it is a clear indication that the "hardcore of militant atheists is getting desperate" because the anti-religion left is losing the public policy debate.

And although some might argue that such inflammatory rhetoric as can be found at ChurchArson.com is protected under the First Amendment, Jacobs says this is not a free-speech issue. He disagrees strongly with those who compare what the anti-religion website does to nonviolent political or social protest, as he says a number of liberal groups have tried to do.

But in the case of the irreligious vandalism- and violence-promoting website, the Howard Center spokesman points out that there is a fundamental difference. "If you conduct a peaceful protest," he says, "even if there's a number of people involved, that shouldn't be a criminal activity. But when you advocate killing people, it crosses the line."

Jacobs believes the ChurchArson.com website is based in Virginia and says the state's attorney general has been asked to investigate. Meanwhile, the pro-family leader asserts that religious America will not be intimidated and will continue to call for a return to "those values and virtues" that made the U.S. a great nation.

© 2004 AgapePress all rights reserved.

Binge Drinking Common on U.S. Campuses

Study Finds Binge Drinking Chronic on U.S. Campuses
By Jim Brown
September 15, 2004

(AgapePress) - Researchers are beginning to see just how serious the problem of alcohol abuse is on university campuses around the nation. A recent study shows that binge drinking on college campuses, both among men and women, is more widespread than previously supposed.

According to a study by the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation's Prevention Research Center, it is not at all uncommon for males in college to consume more than 24 alcoholic drinks in a day when they party. The research also indicates that, on about 20 percent of drinking occasions, male college drinkers may have 12 drinks or more.

And although co-eds tend to drink less than their male counterparts, the researchers found many college women also engage in binge drinking. Study author Dr. Paul Gruenewald notes that, although college females drink at these heavy levels about half as often as college males do, they are still at risk. Female college students "drink fairly infrequently," he says. "However, women are much smaller, become intoxicated more rapidly, and are subject to exactly the same kinds of problems, just at lower drinking levels."

The researcher feels the student drinking problem is far worse than many college administrators and parents of college-bound young adults realize. He says both the schools and the students' families need to become better informed and prepared to deal with the situation.

"Parents should be very much aware that college students are at risk for these kinds of problems and should talk to their children about them," Gruenewald says.

As for educators' part, he suggests, "Colleges should spend a bit more time educating kids about these risks of very heavy or very high levels of drinking. Also, since we know these programs are effective, [schools] should work as hard as they can to reduce access to alcohol among these underage drinkers."

Gruenwald says binge drinkers are often thought by their friends to have simply fallen asleep when they have actually passed out and become comatose. Police believe alcohol consumption is to blame for the recent death of a 19-year-old former homecoming queen, whose body was found at a Colorado State University fraternity.

© 2004 AgapePress all rights reserved.

New Book: The War on Mel Gibson

Gibson Hollywood's 'Worst Nightmare,' Says Author
The War on Mel Gibson by Gary North
Review by Randall Murphree
September 15, 2004

(AgapePress) - Gary North is certain of a couple of things regarding Mel Gibson and his blockbuster The Passion of the Christ. First, Gibson has sent the entertainment media a clear message. Second, the liberal media establishment and their humanist groupies are running scared.

"Mel Gibson is their worst nightmare," writes North. The Passion premiered on Ash Wednesday, February 25, garnering $23 million in first-day sales, and $117 million in its first five days. It sold 4.1 million DVD copies its first day.

It offends Hollywood for several reasons. Chief among them, it is an affront to liberal theology, and it threatens to usurp their control over a culture they've so craftily contrived over the last half century. North writes, "The movies have been crowbars that Hollywood's humanists have used for a generation to pry Americans away from their first principles: religious, moral and cultural."

He says The Passion is "the most important recent event in the history of the American culture war." One more thing he's sure of is that the Christian community faces a challenge and an opportunity like never before -- the chance to counter Hollywood's anti-Christian campaign with artistic yet accurate screen adaptations of the gospel.

Charges of Porn, Sadomasochism, 'Gay' Art
Secular reviewers began writing about The Passion as early as seven months before its release. North says it created this piranhic frenzy early in the process because most secular reviewers swim in synchronized formation with Hollywood's elite. They were eager to discredit the film as quickly as possible.

The cacophony of the critics' cries reached high tide in the days leading up to the movie. Media outlets were flooded with charges that The Passion was a gay sadomasochistic film, was pornographic, was a "snuff" film and more. North cites the following examples:

A.O. Scott -- "[T]his film ... shifts from horror-movie suspense to slasher-film dread."
Frank Rich -- "With its laborious build-up to its orgasmic spurtings of blood and other bodily fluids, the film is constructed like nothing so much as a porn movie ...."
David Edelstein -- "This is a two-hour-and six-minute snuff movie -- the Jesus Chainsaw Massacre ...."
Christopher Hitchens -- "[Gibson] has made a film that principally appeals to the gay Christian sadomasochistic community .... If you like seeing handsome young men stripped and tied up and flayed with whips, The Passion of the Christ is the movie for you."
North says the charges of "porn" and "slasher-film" were mere masks to conceal the writers' true motivation -- a hatred for any God who doesn't leave the humanists in control of shaping culture.

"[T]hose who hate the God of the Bible also hate Christ, and those who hate Christ hate His disciples when they openly profess Christ as the only way to salvation," he writes. "There is no doctrine so reviled today by the humanists who dominate the media as the doctrine of final judgment by the God of the Bible."

North's Analysis Validated
While most secular writers echoed the insults above, Michael Medved, orthodox Jew and conservative commentator, praised the artistic excellence of The Passion, as did Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Furthermore, one columnist had the integrity to be honest.

Writing in The Jewish Press, Charles Patterson said, "The trouble with Mel Gibson's film The Passion that opens in more than 2,000 movie theaters on Ash Wednesday (Feb. 25) is not the film itself, but the gospel story on which it is based."

North believes humanist and media leaders are not only running scared these days, they're also running out of steam. Thus, he says it's time for Christians to carpe diem -- seize the day.

"The Great Commission included the redemption of culture," he writes. "It's time for Christians to begin engaging the culture and producing art that reflects the values of the faith.

"Mel Gibson represents what can be done by Christians," he says. "What Gibson has done on a grand scale, other Christians can do on a small scale."

And finally, these challenging words: "Money talks. Competence talks louder. Courage talks loudest of all."

Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie

Fl Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie
By Mike Gaddy
SierraTimes.com
3-1-3

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing
illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press
organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of
journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television
management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false
information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against
any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a
television broadcast.

On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that
Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to
broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story
about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows. The court did
not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast
a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth
in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers.

Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in
front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the
grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate
distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert
Murdock, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or
deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the
Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only
a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.

Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by
the verdict.

© 2003 SierraTimes.com

Big Brother's Always Watching in Britain

Big Brother In Britain
By Jane Wardell
Associated Press
9-15-4

LONDON -- The teenagers who stabbed wealthy Joao Da Costa Mitendele to death before burgling his home were careful to conceal the crime. They used a pretty girl to gain access to his apartment, where they wore rubber gloves while committing the murder.

What they hadn't counted on was the phalanx of video cameras that silently watched and recorded them leaving the local subway station, buying those gloves and approaching 45-year-old Mitendele's apartment in suburban north London. The same cameras caught their hasty return journey to the station half an hour later.

The tapes sealed the fate of the so-called "Honey Trap" gang when played in court earlier this year. Seven of the group were convicted of offenses ranging from manslaughter to conspiracy to rob and sent to jail for a minimum of seven years each.

Big Brother is always watching in Britain.

An estimated 4.2 million closed-circuit TV cameras observe people going about their everyday business, from getting on a bus to lining up at the bank to driving around London. It's widely estimated that the average Briton is scrutinized by 300 cameras a day.

The phenomenon is enabled by the arrival of digital video, cheap memory and sophisticated software. And Britain is acknowledged as the world leader of Orwellian surveillance - perhaps because it has the experience of Irish terrorism, and is on guard for worse.

Chicago is planning to copy London, though on a much smaller scale. Mayor Richard Daley said Thursday 2,000 cameras would be linked in a network monitored by sophisticated software to alert authorities to potential crimes or acts of terrorism.

London authorities maintain the cameras deter crime, and despite some claims to the contrary and the outrage of civil libertarians, the public seems willing to accept the constant monitoring for the greater good.

In the past two months, British police used or publicized CCTV imagery during investigations into a 12-year-old robbing a store at gunpoint, the disappearance of a doctor, attacks by a serial rapist, a father and son hit by a train, laptops stolen from a school and a soccer riot.

Cameras loom over city centers, shopping malls, train stations, university grounds, public parks, beaches, airports, offices and schools.

"Britain, almost without anyone noticing, has become the surveillance capital possibly of the world, certainly of Europe," said Barry Hugill, a spokesman for the civil rights group Liberty.

The cameras are concentrated mostly in the main cities. In London, the train stations contain 1,800 cameras. And there are more than 6,000 cameras in the London Underground - including at Edgware Station in north London where Mitendele's killers were caught on tape - and 260 around Parliament.

"The uses are absolutely phenomenal. In some places, there are cameras in schools in the classroom so parents can be shown the footage if a child misbehaves," said Peter Fry, spokesman for the CCTV Users Group.

The ability to store images digitally has played a key role in fostering the industry's growth. Gas stations around the country are testing automatic number plate recognition to catch people who fill up but don't pay. The technology is also being used to enforce London's $9 charge for vehicles entering the city center. A police database scans license plate numbers for everything from suspected terrorists to traffic offenders. Mobile cameras are moved to crime hotspots.

Some communities have asked for cameras to be installed, seeking to scare off prostitutes and drug dealers.

In his new book, "The Naked Lunch, Reclaiming Security and Freedom in an Anxious Age," American author Jeffrey Rosen expressed amazement at the easy acceptance.

"Instead of being perceived as an Orwellian intrusion, the cameras in Britain ... were hailed as the people's technology, a friendly eye in the sky, not Big Brother but a kindly and watchful uncle or aunt," he wrote.

However, not everyone in Britain is happy with the seemingly relentless march of CCTV across the country. The Trades Union Council has warned of a rise in the illegal use of cameras to monitor employee behavior.

Will Kittow, 38, a van driver enjoying a coffee break in Soho, said he was concerned about how many times he is captured on film driving around London.

"All this information is going somewhere. It doesn't take a genius to work out that it is going to be misused," he said.

A study by crime reduction charity NACRO found the technology reduced crime by only 3 percent to 4 percent while better street lighting led to a 20 percent reduction.

"There's an illusion that it makes people safe when it does no such thing," said Ian Brown, a researcher at the Foundation for Information Policy Research.

© 2004 Daily Herald, Paddock Publications, Inc.

New Film 'Kinsey' Promotes Child Molester

New Hollywood Film 'Kinsey' Promotes Child Molester Who Launched 'Sexual Revolution'
News With Views | September 15 2004

Concerned Women of America (CWA) has sounded the alarm on a new Hollywood film to debut in November: Kinsey. According to Concerned Women of America:

"For more than 55 years, pioneer sex researcher Alfred C. Kinsey's work has had a profound effect on American culture. Once a household name, Kinsey is not known to most people under 40. Yet his studies in the late 1940s and early 1950s, heralded as the first "scientific" look at sex, became the foundation of the sexual revolution that has rocked not only America but the world.

"Kinsey's relative anonymity will change in November, when the film Kinsey, starring Liam Neeson, is slated for release. According to early reports, the movie, directed by homosexual activist Bill Condon, glosses over the stunning fact that much of Kinsey's work has been revealed as fraud, and that he aided and abetted the molestation of hundreds of children in order to obtain data on "child sexuality."

"Kinsey's work has been instrumental in advancing acceptance of pornography, homosexuality, abortion, and condom-based sex education, and his disciples even today are promoting a view of children as "sexual beings." Their ultimate goal: to normalize pedophilia, or "adult-child sex."

In 2000, Dr. Judith A. Reisman, PhD., put out a book titled, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences. This book received very high praise, i.e. "In the course of producing my documentary - Kinsey's Paedophiles - it became clear that every substantive allegation Reisman made was not only true but thoroughly sourced with documentary evidence - despite the Kinsey Institute's reluctance to open its files." Tim Late, UNESCO and Amnesty International Award-winning producer-director of "Kinsey's Paedophiles"

In Reisman's book, Crimes & Conseuqences, The Red Queen & The Grand Scheme are exposed:

"In 1948, the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University was led by eugenicist Alfred C. Kinsey, whose sex research shook America's moral foundations and launched the 1960s Sexual Revolution. Fifty years later new revelations confirm Dr. Judith Reisman's 1981 expose of scientific fraud and criminally derived data contained in the publicly funded Kinsey Reports.

"Dr. Reisman revealed that Kinsey conducted human experiments in a soundproof laboratory built to his specifications at Indiana University, and that the sexual abuse of at least 317 infants and young boys was a scientific protocol for Kinsey's 1948 report. Dr. Reisman discloses for the first time the ongoing consequences to the American people and the world based on Kinsey's deliberately skewed research.

"Kinsey died in 1956 but his Institute endures today under the expanded title of "The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction," suggesting an even more ominous threat to human rights and liberty."

The funding for this institute at Indiana University is paid by the citizens of the State of Indiana through taxes and through federal grant money appropriated by Congress and channeled through Health and Human Services (HHS).

Eugenics is defined as: The study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding.

Another well known eugenicist was Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. In a scathing condemnation of Sanger, BlackGenocide.org states:

"From the beginning, Sanger advocacy of sex education reflected her interest in population control and birth prevention among the "unfit." Her first handbook, published for adolescents in 1915 and entitled, What Every Boy and Girl Should Know, featured a jarring afterword: 'It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stoop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them.'

"To Sanger, the ebbing away of moral and religious codes over sexual conduct was a natural consequence of the worthlessness of such codes in the individual's search for self-fulfillment. "Instead of laying down hard and fast rules of sexual conduct," Sanger wrote in her 1922 book Pivot of Civilization, "sex can be rendered effective and valuable only as it meets and satisfies the interests and demands of the pupil himself." Her attitude is appropriately described as libertinism, but sex knowledge was not the same as individual liberty, as her writings on procreation emphasized.

"The second edition of Sanger's life story, An Autobiography, appeared in 1938. There Sanger described her first cross-country lecture tour in 1916. Her standard speech asserted seven conditions of life that "mandated" the use of birth control: the third was "when parents, though normal, had subnormal children"; the fourth, "when husband and wife were adolescent"; the fifth, "when the earning capacity of the father was inadequate." No right existed to exercise sex knowledge to advance procreation. Sanger described the fact that "anyone, no matter how ignorant, how diseased mentally or physically, how lacking in all knowledge of children, seemed to consider he or she had the right to become a parent."

Kinsey, starring Liam Neeson, is due to be released in a limited number of theaters nationwide on November 14, 2004.

-----

http://www.savethemales.ca/000165.html

The Kinsey Report: How a Rockefeller Funded Study Laid the Groundwork For Today's Moral and Cultural Collapse
Henry Makow | August 10 2004

What kind of man is this?

He is fastidious about his appearance, his home and his possessions. He wants as much sex as possible and chooses sexual partners mostly on the basis of appearance. He is self-absorbed and doesn't want emotional involvement or commitment. He thinks a woman would stifle him and children would be a burden.

Does this sound like many gays? It is also the masculine ideal purveyed by Playboy magazine to men since the 1950's.

The essence of manhood is to lead and support a family. But in 1972, 3 out of 4 male college students got their ideas about masculinity from Playboy, at an incalculable price to themselves, women, children and society.

The similarity between the Playboy and homosexual ideal is no coincidence. "The Kinsey Report" (1948) shaped current mainstream attitudes to sex. It championed unfettered sexual expression and became the manifesto of the counterculture. It inspired Hugh Hefner to start Playboy in 1953.

Essentially "The Kinsey Report" said that aberrant sexual behavior was so common as to be normal. Thanks to psychologist Dr. Judith Reisman, we now know that Alfred Kinsey was a homosexual and the "Kinsley Report" was a fraud.

Kinsey, a University of Indiana zoologist, pretended to be a Conservative family man. In fact, he seduced his male students and forced his wife and associates to perform in homemade pornographic films. To prove that children have legitimate sexual needs. Kinsey and his fellow pedophiles either abused 2,000 infants and children and/or relied on data obtained in Nazi concentration camps. (Judith Reisman, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, 1998, p.312)

Reisman concludes: "America's growing libidinous pathologies...taught in schools...and reflected in our fine and popular arts, the press, law and public policy largely mirror the documented sexual psychopathologies of the Kinsey team itself."

Sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, Kinsey's goal was "to supplant what he saw as a narrow procreational Judeo Christian era with a promiscuous "anything goes" bi/gay pedophile paradise." Reisman, Crafting Gay Children: An Inquiry, p.4 He cruised Times Square looking for subjects. More than 25% of his sample were prostitutes and prison inmates including many sex offenders. Kinsey, who died prematurely of disease associated with impotence and self-mutilation (orchitis, Reisman p. 278), said 10 per cent of American men were gay when in fact only two per cent were.

Hugh Hefner said the Kinsey Report "produced a tremendous sexual awakening, largely because of media attention..." This shows how the elite orchestrates social change using media hype. (See Reisman, Kinsey, p.307)

With messianic fervor, Playboy took its gospel of sexual freedom to the American male who in the 1950's-1960's still consecrated sex for marriage. Playboy's aim, the aim of all pornographers, was to hook men on the glossy fantasy. To do this, they had to prevent them from finding true satisfaction in marriage.

In Reisman's words, "Playboy was the first national magazine to exploit college men's fears of women and family commitment. Playboy offered itself as a reliable, comforting substitute for monogamous heterosexual love." (Judith Reisman, "Soft Porn Plays Hardball," p 47)

Thus sworn enemies, Playboy and radical feminists, found common ground in hatred of the nuclear family. As a result, society now suffers from epidemics of family breakdown, pornography, impotence, child sexual abuse, sadosexual violence, teen pregnancy, a cocktail of STD's and, of course, AIDS. The birthrate has plummeted by 50% since 1960 and is barely at replacement level.

Homosexuality is a developmental disorder defined by the failure to establish a permanent bond with a member of the opposite sex. Psychologist Richard Cohen, in "Coming Out Straight: Understanding and Healing Homosexuality" (2000) argues it is caused when a male child fails to bond with his father. By having sex with men, the adult gay is trying to compensate for father-love denied in adolescence.

Cohen was gay and is now married with three children. He attributes lesbianism to a woman's reaction to being rebuffed or abused by her father. He has assisted hundreds of homosexuals, but is under constant attack for undermining the gay political agenda, (i.e. to redefine societal norms.)

Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover has pointed to another cause of homosexuality. A 1990 survey of 1000 gays shows that an older or more powerful partner physically assaulted 37% of them before the age of 19. ("Homosexuality and American Public Life," 1999, p.24). In addition, according to Anne Moir in "Why Men Don't Iron," some men may be "born gay" due to foetal hormone imbalances. They seem to be a minority.

For many decades, gays were told that they were "sick" and cruelly and wrongly persecuted. The gay activist solution: convince the world that, in fact, it is heterosexuals who are sick. In 1973, they bullied the American Psychological Association into proclaiming homosexuality normal. Together with feminist activists (who believe heterosexuality is inherently oppressive) gay activists began to dismantle all heterosexual institutions: masculinity, femininity, marriage, the nuclear family, the boy scouts, sports, and the military.

Backed by the financial elite, gay activists and their supporters now largely dictate our cultural sensibility. They are responsible for the puerile pornographic obsession that pervades television, music videos and the Internet. This state of arrested human development is characteristic of many homosexuals. But straights have been homosexualized too. With women acting like men, and vice versa, we can't establish a "permanent bond with a member of the opposite sex" either. The elite's purpose is to promote social dysfunction and depopulation. See "Feminism and the Elite Depopulation Agenda".

Gay liberation manuals talk about "normalizing" their sexuality and "de-sensitizing" straights by flaunting it. I was livid when I took my 10-year-old son to see Adam Sandler's movie "Billy Madison" and heard one teenage male youth in the film casually ask another: "Would you rather bone Pamela Anderson or a young Jack Nicholson?"

Last week, on TV's "Will and Grace," Jack who is gay dons an apron that says "Kiss the cook" pretending he thought the second "o" was a "c". Just as Communists once conned do-gooders to think radicalism was chic, gay activists define trendy for gullible liberals today.

Gay and feminist activists think traditional morality was invented to perpetuate an unjust status quo. In fact, morality is the accumulated wisdom of mankind regarding what is healthy and ultimately fulfilling. Perversion is deviation from what is healthy.

Heterosexual morality places sex in the context of love and/or marriage because it is healthy and human. It ensures that the most profound and intimate physical act between two people expresses a commensurate emotional-spiritual bond. Promiscuous sex is a desperate plea for love. Love and marriage answer that call and provide for the natural and necessary outcome of sex, children.

With Hugh Hefner's help, Alfred Kinsey detached sex from love and procreation. He reduced it to another physical function like urinating. Homosexual activists champion anonymous sex: a majority of gays have 10s-100s of partners each year. In less extreme form, heterosexuals have adopted this model. Recently a social columnist enviously described straight friends whose relationships have ended: "they're out partying, having the time and the sex, it seems of their lives."

In conclusion, the "sexual revolution" was really a triumph of an elite program of arrested development. See also "The CIA, Homosexuality and Underdevelopment." The elite agenda is to redefine healthy as deviant and vice-versa and they have succeeded. In 40 short years, almost all sexual constraints have dissolved and heterosexual society is reeling. The cultural and social breakdown will only get worse unless there is a counterrevolution.